Repeal the Laws, Back Our Industries
It was a big week in Parliament for the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party, with firearms reform, fishing rights, personal freedoms and government accountability firmly on the agenda. Mark Banasiak and Robert Borsak took the fight directly to politicians who think more regulation is always the answer, while outside the chamber we brought the shooting community together behind a united campaign to repeal the firearms laws rushed through Parliament last December. We also took on policies pushed by the Greens and Animal Justice Party that too often treat hunters, shooters and sustainable Australian businesses as the problem.
The Fight to Repeal the Firearms Laws Is On
Mark Banasiak formally introduced the Firearms Legislation Amendment (Reforms Repeal) Bill 2026, giving Parliament the opportunity to reverse the firearms changes rushed through following the Bondi attack. Mark argued that evidence emerging since December points to failures in intelligence, information sharing, governance and administration, not a lack of firearms laws. His Bill would restore five year licence terms, bring back independent merits review through NCAT and repeal firearms provisions imposed on lawful owners without adequate scrutiny or evidence that they would improve public safety.
For too long, those who support tighter firearms restrictions have taken the politically easy option of targeting people who already follow the law. Mark also highlighted independent economic modelling estimating hundreds of millions of dollars in buyback and administration costs, potential job losses and reduced economic activity. If the Government believes these restrictions represent value for taxpayers and will genuinely improve public safety, it should produce its own modelling and prove it. Those resources could instead be directed towards intelligence, organised crime, illicit firearms trafficking and genuine threats to the community.
The parliamentary fight was matched by action outside the chamber. On Tuesday 4 August, SFF hosted the inaugural meeting of the NSW Firearms Laws Repeal Working Group in Parliament's Jubilee Room. Representatives from Shooters Union Australia, SIFA, SSAA NSW, Used Guns, NSW Firearms Dealers Association, Australian Pig Doggers and Hunters Association, Australian Recreation Union, Australian Deer Association, Sporting Shooter Magazine, New South Wales Amateur Pistol Association, Federation of Hunting Clubs and NSW Clay Target Association came together to strategise as one community.
The shooting community is united and is finished with being used as a political football. Politicians cannot tell licensed shooters before an election that they understand their concerns, then disappear when bad firearms laws come before Parliament. The Government, Opposition and crossbench now have a clear choice. Back the repeal bill or explain to licensed firearms owners why they support keeping these restrictions in place.
Click on the link below to watch Mark's second reading speech:
Government Confirms It Uses Suppressors
Robert Borsak put a straightforward question to the Environment Minister on Thursday. Does the National Parks and Wildlife Service use suppressors during wild animal control operations? The answer was yes. The Minister confirmed suppressors are used where there are safety or operational reasons, including deer control near urban areas and horse control in Kosciuszko National Park.
That admission exposes the double standard at the heart of so much firearms policy. Government agencies recognise suppressors are practical tools with legitimate safety and operational uses when it suits them, while lawful private users can face restrictions and difficulties obtaining permits for the same equipment. Robert put that contradiction squarely on the parliamentary record. Firearms policy should be based on evidence and genuine risk, not fear campaigns or the assumption that another restriction on licensed owners must automatically make the community safer.
Click on the link below to watch Robert's Question Without Notice:
Standing Up for Commercial Fishers as Illegal Abalone Trade Continues
Mark Banasiak turned his attention to the abalone industry, challenging the Government over whether its new seafood enforcement measures will actually pursue illegal abalone throughout the entire supply chain. Legitimate commercial operators are facing reduced catches as stocks come under pressure, yet Mark argued illegal harvesting and sales have been allowed to continue while the people following the rules carry the burden. He pressed the Minister on whether enforcement would apply consistently to anyone taking, possessing, advertising or selling abalone outside the lawful commercial program.
Mark followed up with a supplementary question and Take Note speech, making clear this is not a new problem. He has pursued concerns around abalone poaching and the non proclamation of section 21AA for years, including through budget estimates and a parliamentary inquiry. Mark argued that uncontrolled illegal harvesting makes a mockery of total allowable catches, harvest strategies and recovery plans while legitimate commercial fishers are expected to accept more restrictions. He also raised allegations and material concerning illegal abalone sales that he says had already been brought to the department's attention. Tougher laws and government announcements mean little if authorities fail to act on the information already put in front of them.
Click on the link below to watch Mark's Question Without Notice, Supplementary Question and Take Note speech:
Medicinal Cannabis, Driving and Protecting Your Privacy
Mark also spoke on the Road Transport Legislation Amendment (Medicinal Cannabis and Driving Offences) Bill 2026, supporting the principle that people prescribed medicinal cannabis should not be forced to choose between taking medication that provides relief and being able to drive. SFF supports reform in this area, but Mark raised concerns about relying solely on prescribed cannabis levels rather than some form of impairment testing. He also questioned why warnings should be available for cannabis related driving offences when people who misjudge their alcohol consumption do not receive the same treatment.
Of particular concern is privacy and how information identifying medicinal cannabis patients could be used elsewhere in government. Mark warned that if this information becomes accessible to police and, by extension, the Firearms Registry, medicinal cannabis patients who are also licensed firearms owners could find themselves subjected to additional scrutiny simply because of their medication. He pointed to the Registry's treatment of some veterans as an example of why these concerns cannot be dismissed. SFF will move an amendment aimed at strengthening privacy protections so people are not discouraged from participating in the scheme because they fear being targeted in another government process.
Click on the link below to watch Mark's speech:
A Win Against Greens Ideology in Newcastle City Council
Robert Borsak took aim at the Newcastle City Council's blanket policy preventing the sale of fur products and exotic animal skins on council land, a policy originating from a Greens motion. The policy caught ethical Australian traders such as Heidi's Hides, despite its products coming from feral animal control, livestock production, lawful wildlife management and recycled materials. Robert argued that lumping those products together with intensive overseas fur farming is what happens when Greens ideology replaces evidence and practical environmental management.
The contradiction is difficult to ignore. The Greens and Animal Justice Party campaign against natural hides while policies they promote can favour synthetic faux fur and so called vegan leather made using petroleum based plastics. Meanwhile, hides from animals already lawfully harvested through pest management or agricultural production can simply go to waste. That is not sensible environmentalism. It is ideology producing a worse practical outcome while Australian businesses and regional industries carry the cost.
The pressure produced a result. Newcastle City Council subsequently confirmed Australian furs and skins could be sold at its events. Robert followed the win with a Notice of Motion congratulating Heidi's Hides and its supporters and calling on other councils with similar bans to follow Newcastle's lead. His motion also pushed for greater recognition of ethical Australian hides, sustainable resource use and domestic tanning and leather manufacturing.
Click on the link below to watch Robert's Private Members Statement and Notice of Motion:
This week showed why SFF representation matters. We are not interested in accepting the argument that another restriction, another ban or another layer of bureaucracy must automatically be good policy. Whether it comes from governments looking for an easy target after a tragedy or the Greens and Animal Justice Party pushing ideological restrictions that hurt hunters, shooters and sustainable industries, we will call it out. Mark and Robert will keep standing with the people who hunt, shoot, fish, farm and run businesses across New South Wales, and we will keep fighting for evidence, individual freedoms and common sense in Parliament.
